I forgot to respond to this, obviously they don't have a mini rotating antenna, that's not how it's done, they have an antenna array that gives a very similar effect. Interestingly enough, this should also make WPA2 more secure since capturing handshakes after sending DEAUTHs should prove more difficult.

Yeah, sounds very good on paper. But most WLAN router vendors make devices that don't have highly sophisticated antenna grids but just two omni-antennas attached to the back of the router. In these cases, beam-forming is just a buzzword to sell more devices to people like you.

Relative to other systems it's great, but I definitely can't just purchase a device and expect it to be essentially plug n play.

what is "a device"?

I'd appreciate if you could refrain from undifferentiated phrase like the above. You did not even bother to read the existing documentation regarding home automation device support. You can't expect from any HA/MCE software to support every piece on the horizon. We support plenty of devices and many of them plug and play. But you need to do your homework. This is a community project. If you don't want to take the effort better buy a tailored solution like Dianmeo, Crestron, control4, home seer, micasa verde or others..

Relative to other systems it's great, but I definitely can't just purchase a device and expect it to be essentially plug n play.

Are you in the habit of buying devices without checking their compatibility for a given distribution of linux? If so, I would suggest that this is an unwise practice.

Anything *buntu 10.04 capable, we can use. For direct control/integration into the system a device template will be needed. We have thousands and thousands of device templates... and you have the ability to create your own fairly simply, depending on the device (which is why we have thousands).

The rest of you can continue dissing me over my slight gaff, but I think there's no denying that LinuxMCE isn't exactly "user-friendly" by most standards, obviously that just comes with Linux, which is why I said "what else would I expect." I'm not saying the product isn't impressive, there's nothing out there like it. However, if this is really how you guys respond to new members to the community, that is definitely something I don't find impressive. This response was acceptable:

Quote

Anything *buntu 10.04 capable, we can use. For direct control/integration into the system a device template will be needed. We have thousands and thousands of device templates... and you have the ability to create your own fairly simply, depending on the device (which is why we have thousands).

The rest was insulting.

I posted this topic because I did my research and the results I found were that very few people had even attempted to use LinuxMCE wirelessly, and even less had even tried it using 802.11N, let alone ac. My comments regarding device support are based on the fact that there's no current support for the devices necessary for a completely wireless setup. I'm not dissing LinuxMCE's ability to perform the way you guys are using it, I'm pointing out an area that seems to have been set aside, and may potentially be viable with newer technology.

Yeah, sounds very good on paper. But most WLAN router vendors make devices that don't have highly sophisticated antenna grids but just two omni-antennas attached to the back of the router. In these cases, beam-forming is just a buzzword to sell more devices to people like you.

I would agree with you on prior wireless devices that claimed beamforming, but it's written into the spec on 802.11ac, so it'll be the norm.

The rest of you can continue dissing me over my slight gaff, but I think there's no denying that LinuxMCE isn't exactly "user-friendly" by most standards, obviously that just comes with Linux, which is why I said "what else would I expect." I'm not saying the product isn't impressive, there's nothing out there like it. However, if this is really how you guys respond to new members to the community, that is definitely something I don't find impressive. This response was acceptable:The rest was insulting.

You suggested we don't cover many devices. This is patently untrue. We cover more devices, natively, than anything I am aware of. There are certainly wikis dedicated to pnp hardware... but we have the ability to make the overwhelming majority of linux capable devices pnp... someone who understands them just has to make a new template for a device. It came across as though you were unimpressed with one of our strongest features. How "user-friendly" LMCE is scaled by the abilities of the installer. We have worked very hard on making it user friendly... even to install... esp as of 1004... on a much wider array of hardware.

I am not "dissing" you. I was dead serious, if you just "buy stuff that sounds cool" without checking its compatibility, as you seemed to suggest you felt you should be able to do, I believe this is a poor practice. If you would like to clarify, that is fine... I don't know you... I don't know your familiarity with linux. I deal with a lot of noobs. I give support to a lot of noobs. I spoke to you exactly as I speak to anyone for whom I am unfamiliar a level of understanding on the subject at hand, especially following a profoundly inaccurate characterization of device handling. I was cordial, though you came across as insulting to the project. If you construe that as rude... then color me rude. I do not speak for the project... I was trying to answer your questions.

I posted this topic because I did my research and the results I found were that very few people had even attempted to use LinuxMCE wirelessly, and even less had even tried it using 802.11N, let alone ac. My comments regarding device support are based on the fact that there's no current support for the devices necessary for a completely wireless setup. I'm not dissing LinuxMCE's ability to perform the way you guys are using it, I'm pointing out an area that seems to have been set aside, and may potentially be viable with newer technology.

I would agree with you on prior wireless devices that claimed beamforming, but it's written into the spec on 802.11ac, so it'll be the norm.

That was exactly how it came across, and why I replied initially to explain what the actual problem with wireless was... because it seemed as though you had just read a bunch of stuff about 802.11ac, and not understanding how the messaging system worked, thought it might "fix" the misunderstood problem.

It would be awesome if it did. I thoroughly encourage you to test. I will gladly, and with more sensitivity to your fear you are being talked down to, lend any help I can. I hope this finds you well.

hey what do you expect :-) You're talking about limited device support because your two gadget proposals for brand new stuff are not implemented yet? Heck you were pointed to existing stuff that works well. Z-Wave is mature and there are a lot of other options like KNX and others. Home automation does not stop right after the bulb. You got a lot of valuable information in this thread. Still you tell us everything was insulting?

The rest of you can continue dissing me over my slight gaff, but I think there's no denying that LinuxMCE isn't exactly "user-friendly" by most standards, obviously that just comes with Linux, which is why I said "what else would I expect." I'm not saying the product isn't impressive, there's nothing out there like it. However, if this is really how you guys respond to new members to the community, that is definitely something I don't find impressive. This response was acceptable:The rest was insulting.

I posted this topic because I did my research and the results I found were that very few people had even attempted to use LinuxMCE wirelessly, and even less had even tried it using 802.11N, let alone ac. My comments regarding device support are based on the fact that there's no current support for the devices necessary for a completely wireless setup. I'm not dissing LinuxMCE's ability to perform the way you guys are using it, I'm pointing out an area that seems to have been set aside, and may potentially be viable with newer technology.

I would agree with you on prior wireless devices that claimed beamforming, but it's written into the spec on 802.11ac, so it'll be the norm.

Well, you are certainly free to build your own moonbase with beer, and hookers, and whatever else. Maybe you walked in to a landmine with the 'limited devices' statement considering how many hours people here have poured into making devices work.

Either way, its the internet. Grow some skin, lick you wounds, and move on with life. I had taken certain browbeatings for ignorant statements I made too personally, I might never have become a Linuxmce developer. So in short choose to either do something about it or be quiet already. If we got all pissy about something coming across as insulting, nothing would ever get done around here.

jeebus!

Logged

Linuxmce - Where everyone is never wrong, but we are always behind xbmc in the media / ui department.